>> my understanding is this will be implemented but the six month time frame is appropriate if that is something we're required to do. >> okay. so for will be implemented -- yes. as long as there is a time frame. >> okay. i will use that as a default, for time period for coit and department of technology to work with this on the budget analyst or controller. for finding four and appoint two members without delay. from my understanding will be implemented and while the city has not moved on it for six months i expect this to be. >> >> six years i expect the city to work on this and get it done in the next six months or six weeks. next is have a plan and budget and reviewed by coit and to the mayor's office and the board of supervisors. again what is fascinating about the

answers and all of the agencies are across the map. some say yes. some say no. some say it's implemented. some say it's not. it will be implemented and always a cit budget but not decisions related to that budget. recommendation number six. subject to coit approval of the i kr.d t budget and staffing plans coit and the cio must monitor adherence to these plans and i think what i will say for this should be implemented within the next six months. one of the challenges we face challenges here at the board and coit and time lines and budgets keep slipping and it's important to have monitoring that continues. recommendation number seven. the cio position be elevated to

this and there is significant split of opinion on what we should do. it's my perspective and having cio's report to department heads and sit around coit once a month and talk about it issues is not enough to get the job done. on the other hand i am concerned and not sure what it would look like for them to report up to a department head and the cio and i stated this requires further analysis and within departments with no function relationships with the city cio, continued to excel bait the lack of. >> >> exacerbate the lack of coordination and ask them to further consider what is the best way for the departmental cio to interact with the city cio? for recommendation number eight the recommendation is

that staff support be provided to the city cio and coit. my understanding is this is already being done so that is the answer for recommendation number nine. amend the administrative code to separate the position of the city cio from the department much technology. we are in the process of occupying up. >> >> mr. walton has been acting as the cio for one year now? two years now which has been a problem and i would have find if we made the acting cio, the cio and that's the mayor's opinion and i think the answer to this is requires further anal scpises require

whether the two positions are needed after the new cio is hired and similarly for recommendation number ten which is to amend the administrative code to create separate position of the director of dt pointed to -- appointed by and to the city's cio and same analysis after the new cio is hired. that is in the first phase and now let's go to the second and my apologies for speaking quickly. although address although these bodies address technology on a city wide basis technology is not treated as a distinct organizational entity and i agree. i think it should be treated as a city wide and departmental function and hr function, or the controller's function. some functions need to be centralized and others

will always within within their departments. and by the way i just want to deas for members of the public and city staff it's not my perspective that we should centralize all things. clearly the department of public health needs those records and the airport needs those those things and we all have emails and there is a blend in the different activities and they should be handled a bit differently is something that we need to do. finding number 15. there is no comprehensive annual report on the state of technology within city government presented to the mayor and the board of supervisors. agree. there is no annual reporting. we supposed to have biannual reporting and just as we have annual revisions to the ten year capital plan i think ict plan would benefit from annual review. 16. there is a scarcity in the data separate

from departmental budgets. agree. it's difficult to get data from individual departments and what should be consolidated. finding number 17 -- and i have to point out to the civil grand jury aren't you glad you had all these find ?tion number 17, coit focuses on the implementation of city wide projects and not the cost and savings from the project. i agree. while these have been attempted for city wide it's minimal and proper departments are not inventized to calculate the savings and costs of this and potential lose resources. finding number 18.

there's a need for city wide ict asset management system. 18. i agree. departments should provide this data to the department of technology. the fact it's not done is reflective of the fact that departments are not willing to share or centralize these assets. finding 19. there is a need for data base of city wide personnel. agree. this could assist coit in the city cio to understand duplicative functions and prchl personnel to assist different functions. let's go to recommendations. recommendation number 11 which is a recommendation to the city cio work with the controller for a survey not limited to performance data, et cetera and for this i would state requires further analysis. the city cio should work to provide survey

performance, decision making and annual baselines to measure performance. recommendation number 12. the city cio should report annually on the state of technology to the mayor and the supervisors. my understanding this will be implemented with the new cio and there is little by the board of supervisors except for the supervisors that have chosen to learn more. recommendation number 13. the city cio or the controller create asset management system for cio equipment. i will state this will be implemented from my understanding in the next six months and this is only prudent. recommendation number 14 is that the city cio and the department of human resources create a data base for personnel to cal log

services and operating system. recommendation 14. what i had stated here requires further analysis but i would say i think we agree that would help departments and identifying resources. i would like to work closely with labor and department heads to understand the best way to move this forward. so one more page is findings and recommendations. let's go to finding number 20. find be number 20. there is no effort to gather and utilize comprehensive and quantitative data to track how ict functions and what i stated for this i personally disagree. while there are efforts to see how they function departments don't

have incentive to assist in such efforts. finding number 21. the five year ict plan is not a strategic plan. it doesn't calculate how the changes in the system would impact the cost and i agree with that and ought to be that plan at this time but only current plan of projects. number 22. they are experiencing difficulty in hiring these group of people with skills and i agree and hiring managers with cutting edge experience has been extremely challenging. finding number 23. relying on permanent civil service as standard way of hiring technology is too slow and cumbersome for the business needs of ict units, and what i would say to this is partially

agree. city government needs to contemplate and less cumbersome mechanisms and in consult ainz with labor. number 24. and -- i would state -- i would amend some language i have in here partially agree. city government needs to contemplate the mechanisms beyond the current system to hire the best ict staff again in consultation with labor partners. now going to the recommendation in this section about how we improve some of our labor and work functions. recommendation number 15. the recommendation

is we revise the city charter and all positions are classified as exempt two positions and i stated requires further analysis. the city should look at alternatives and implentded without changes to the city charter. from my perspective we can make changes but if we can did do that without would be ideal. next according to the mayor's response this has been implemented and the cio should be involved with hiring of this personnel and number 17 and included with department heads in performance review process of current ict personnel. what i stated for this requires further analysis. if there are functional relationships between

the city cio and departmental cio's they should assist them in the reviews. and recommendation 18 pending charter revision mayor develop methods for speeding up the hiring process for ict personnel. and the mayor should speed up the method for hiring ict personnel. finding number 25. city technology culture is based on the belief that departments work on individual missions in expense of city wide needs. partially disagree. while few departments say their needs should trump city wide concerns bureaucratic turf has created this culture and not promote cooperation. finding number 26.

the cooperative attitude among departments and dt previously founded by earlier civil grand jury has faded and what i have said to that i would actually disagree with that. i think in the last few years there has been improvement and cooperation between departments but still a good chance to achieve. i will say partially disagree. finding number 27, a department first perspective, not the city wide perspective, intended in the administrative code has resulted in lack of coordination and communication between the departments and for this i would state agreed. the fact that these projects have taken so long to take forward is the attitude that perminates city agencies. next i also agree and it's difficult to move departments in the same

direction. 29, department heads and cio's don't grant the authority for them in the administrative code as governing their own plans and actions. for this i agree. finding 30. neither coit or the cio believe in their ability to enforce these policies and initiatives and i patiently agree with that statement. while coit likes to behave they have the authority to enforce policies and initiatives because it's a diffused body there is no one to hold them accountable. the last finding there is no secure or immediate consequences for departments failing to implement in city wide initiatives and meet time lines for compleetion. i agree. there are no

consequences for them to meet time lines for completion and the last is recommendation 19 which is the recommendation is that the mayor provide consistent passionate and aggressive leadership in the field of city wide technology fostering progress and garnderring agreement moon departments and cooperative and cohesive culture. the mayor has stated that has been implemented. i would like to say i hope that is implemented on in the next six months and demand accountability for budgets and deadlines and more cohesive culture and the sharing of work, so with that mr. chair you're going to do the findings and recommendations for the next one, but the only thing i would just like to say in conclusion is i know that this is a topic

that touches a lot of nerves. there are a lot of folks working hard within individual departments, within department of technology and within the mayor's office to move us in a good direction and one thing i would like to state the recommendations i am recommending is no way pointing specific fingers anywhere, but i think that we have to have honest and real dialogue about what we need to do to move things forward and i have to tell you i hope this is the last time the civil grand jury has to come to the board to give a report like this and i appreciate the work you have done. we might not have full agreement in the solutions but i think we need to spend more time, both at coit and whoever the new cio is to figure out the next steps. it's my perspective

and while we're capital of innovation it's really the private sector and i can't say a city government that puts lotus notes on my email system is capital of innovation in the public sector. i think many of the technologies are stuck in 1999 and unless we do this we will -- there will be future supervisors who will have larger binder of folders of additional reports and all the monies wasted and the efficiencies wasted and not taking the opportunity to move into a real 21st century government and i take we take this to heart and really work on, so in a few years we will truly win the seven awards that the department of technology received but we are a model for how we manage the technology for years to

come and with that chairman. >> thank you president chiu. i want to thank all the departments that came to respond as well. i couldn't agree with more of the point of this report. obviously we have a lot of work to do. i am one of the members of the board of supervisors frustrated where we are with the technology here in san francisco and city government and i will say these challenges are not easy to solve but we're not doing our job on the board if we're not willing innovate and drive that home in house so i look forward to this continuing dialogue so we made a number of findings and recommendations. what i am going to do before making a motion i am open it up for public comment. if anyone would like to speak for public comment and we will have two minutes per person. >> great. david pillpow and i was watching this somewhere else and i know you were concerned

there was no public comment on item one and i ran over. i have been a participant in coit and i have several points. i spoke back in february at coit and express the strong opinion it was time for mr. walton to be replaced as city cio and director of dt. that was a very strong recommendation. that was not something that i took lightly and apparently something that shocked a number of people and the responses speak on to that. i believe that position, head of dt, collaborative and build

trust and if that happens those things will work better and the things run by the department will also work better and there will be that understanding developed but i don't think that's there now and i think that's the root of a lot of what you just talked about. i think coit itself meds to be more functional and really set policy and review policy for the city in terms of it, not just get reports after the fact of things that happened, deadlines that slipd, budgets that slipped and as a final example dt put out rfp for telecomaudit for the city's voice line. i don't believe coit knows about that. i don't know where that was in the budget. i believe there is city staff that could perform that function and ask them why don't

they know where the phone lines are and i hope this gets better and i am happy to engage. >> thank you. anybody else want to speak on public comment on item two? seeing none public comment is closed. president chiu. >> i ask that we move forward the recommendations that i made. >> okay. we can do that without objection. >> again. thank you to everyone . >> >> welcome back everyone. welcome to the government audit and oversight committee. at this point madam clerk can you call item three and four. >> item three is a hearing and four is a resolution and to the

investigation into the san francisco municipal transportation agency. >> thank you very much and back to the civil grand jury. thanks again. if you want to come up and we will hear item three. >> thank you very much supervisors. this time supervisor feral only about eight findings and recommendations. >> i made a good trade. >> yeah. and thanks for hearing about the san francisco municipal transportation agency and switchbacks and behalf of the grand jury and the chair of make the report and assisted in the report. >> thank you very much. >> thank you supervisors. i am sharon gadbury a member of the 2011-2012 grand jury and chair of the better muni service

needed without sich backs report. i would like to thank chairman farrell and supervisor chiu and agencies for taking time to read and respond to our findings and recommendations. i want to thank you also the presiding judge of the superior court and martin choy the acting foreperson and the grand juries that have worked so hard over the one year term. members were selected to be motivated competent and diverse but we all had one thing in common. we love san francisco and we want it to be the best city it can be. when the jury discussed and voted on this muni investigation we deliberately chose to focus on the practice of switchbacks rather than try to investigate

the whole transportation system which i think will make you happy today. we in factually suspected and later convinced that the way muni was using and justifying switchbacks as a tool to regulate service -- that's in quotes, was a blatant breach of the public's trust. the schedules are a promise made by muni to the riders and switchbacks break that promise. we disagree emphatically with the words of muni executive director and passengers have no right to expect that muni's vehicle will complete the route they're riding on announcing muni has no obligation whatsoever to follow the routes it has advertised to riders is

brazen statement disavowing the moral and legal obligations of the transportation system. we believe that the muni schedules are a legal and moral contract between the system and its riders and breaching the contract violates the trust of the riders and their ability to rely on the system to carry out their daily lives in the city. and using switchbacks as a tool muni is deliberately violating rider trust deciding one group of passengers who are riding a bus or train must disrupt their trip and disembark and wait for the next one so the vehicles don't clunk or another line can carry more passengers. in order to smooth traffic the bus or train leaves the route. it's

two fold. it eliminates the late bus or train that is actually causing the clumping and so slow it's in way of the others on the line and it improves the on time record because the slow bus or train is no longer operating. it's great for muni. not so great for the left behind passengers. we're not sure when muni decided to deploy operational switch backs in its system but in early 2011 muni passengers began to complain about switchbacks that left them strandd and waiting on strange platforms in the city. according to their own statistics about 41,000 riders a month were left on the street because of switchbacks. we were told switchbacks were

implemented in the absence of clumping whenever a bus or train was needod another run. this means that the abandoned riders walk to their destination or waited often in the cold and dark and possibly rain until another bus or metro car arrived. we were shocked and amazing to learn as far as muni officials were concerned this provided after overall benefit to passengers because the vehicles were being deployed where they were needed most. plans for the future of muni included more switchbacks, not fewer as muni now claims. what makes this report more germane is the fact that is muni's 100 anniversary to commemorate the mile stein they adopted the logo "the people's system". it seems if you're going to be the

people's system you need to live up to this on lofty label. my fellow jurors that worked on the report will focus on the findings. the first findings find that the switchbacks violate the san francisco charter and guarantees safe and reliable transit service to riders. i won't ask to you raise your hands but just thinking how many of you have taken muni in the last week, or ride muni regularly. if you have and if you do you're probably still subject to switchbacks and understand how deeply the experience can under mine your trust in the system. our fellow juror who was planning present today had to leave due to another appointment, and so i'm going to read her report because i think it's important if you're not a muni rider